The Newsroom => International Defence and Security => Topic started by: milnews.ca on October 18, 2016, 14:18:52

This (https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/post-nation/wp/2016/10/15/it-will-be-a-bloodbath-inside-the-kansas-militia-plot-to-ignite-a-religious-war/?utm_term=.eac35da248ee) from the Washington Post:

Quote

The “Crusaders” knew they wanted to kill Muslims — and with luck, use the “bloodbath” to ignite a religious war — but for months they couldn’t settle on a plan.

The easiest way would be to grab guns, go to the predominantly Somali-Muslim apartment complex they’d been surveilling and start kicking in doors, court documents said. They would spare no one, not even babies.

In the end, they decided to set off bombs similar to the one Timothy McVeigh used in 1995 to kill 168 people in Oklahoma City. They planned to strike after the Nov. 8 election, investigators said ...

More from the U.S. Dep't of Justice (https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/three-kansas-men-charged-plotting-bombing-attack-targeting-local-somali-immigrant-community):

Quote

Curtis Allen and Gavin Wright, both 49, and of Liberal, Kansas, and Patrick Eugene Stein, 47, of Wright, Kansas, appeared in federal court to face a charge of conspiring to use a weapon of mass destruction (explosives), in connection with their plot to detonate bombs at an apartment complex in Garden City, Kansas where Somali immigrants live and worship.

The announcement was made by Assistant Attorney General for National Security John P. Carlin and Acting U.S. Attorney Tom Beall of the District of Kansas.

“According to the complaint, these three defendants conspired to conduct a bombing attack against an apartment complex occupied by men, women and children in the Garden City, Kansas community,” said Assistant Attorney General Carlin. “Protecting our nation from such attacks, whether they are rooted in domestic or international terrorism, is our highest priority.”

“These charges are based on eight months of investigation by the FBI that is alleged to have taken the investigators deep into a hidden culture of hatred and violence,” said Acting U.S. Attorney Beall. “Many Kansans may find it as startling as I do that such things could happen here.”

The complaint alleges that since February the FBI has been investigating the defendants’ activities, including their plans to carry out a violent attack against Muslims in southwestern Kansas. The defendants were key members of a militia group that referred to itself as the Crusaders. A confidential source attended meetings of the group and provided the FBI with information about the defendants’ activities.

The criminal complaint alleges that the men conducted surveillance to identify potential targets, stockpiled firearms, ammunition and explosive components, and planned to issue a manifesto in conjunction with the planned bombing. The attack, the defendants said, would be intended to “wake people up.”

After considering possible targets, the defendants decided to conduct the attack on a Garden City, Kansas apartment complex that houses a mosque and a large number of members of the Somali community. They discussed obtaining four vehicles, filling them with explosives and parking them at the four corners of the apartment complex to create a large explosion.

On Oct.12, Stein met with an undercover FBI employee in rural Finney County, Kansas. After examining and test firing automatic weapons, Stein took the source to see the apartment building that the defendants were targeting in Garden City, Kansas. Stein said he would provide ammonium nitrate for the bomb and contribute $200 to $300 for other materials.

Stein also talked with the undercover employee about defendant Allen’s arrest in a domestic violence case in Liberal, Kansas the previous day, Oct. 11. Stein said he was concerned that Allen’s girlfriend would give the Liberal Police Department in Kansas information about the defendants’ plans.

If convicted, the defendants face a maximum sentence of life in federal prison.

A criminal complaint is merely an allegation, and the defendant is presumed innocent unless and until proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt in a court of law. The maximum statutory sentence is prescribed by Congress and is provided here for informational purposes. If convicted of any offense, the sentencing of the defendant will be determined by the court based on the advisory Sentencing Guidelines and other statutory factors.

Investigating agencies included the FBI, the Liberal Police Department, the Seward County Sheriff’s Office, the Ford County Sheriff’s Office, the Garden City Police Department, the Dodge City Police Department, the Finney County Sheriff’s Office, and Kansas Highway Patrol, and the Kansas Bureau of Investigation. Assistant U.S. Attorney Tony Mattivi for the District of Kansas and Counterterrorism Section Trial Attorney David Cora are prosecuting this case.

So we have one discussion for Muslim religious terrorism, and one for all other known religions. Anyone want to take bets which one will have the shorter list of outrages?

To be fair to the Muslims, they only got started in earnest about a couple of hundred years ago, so have quite a bit of ground to make up, especially to catch up with characters like this: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Troubles

Well the nastiest non-Islamic group would be the Lords Resistance Army, their leader claimed a religious connection, but I think he is/was just outright bonkers and don’t recall them every really claiming any religious motivation.

Well the nastiest non-Islamic group would be the Lords Resistance Army, their leader claimed a religious connection, but I think he is/was just outright bonkers and don’t recall them every really claiming any religious motivation.

Well considering Christian extremists still consider witch burning a thing... I am not so sure. Africa has quite a bit of 'Christian Extremists' but they are called 'militia's'

It seems that the FBI didn't do the takedown in the typical manner as they have with Islamic radicals in the US. In the majority of those cases they have used undercover operatives to act as fellow supporters and provided access to "explosives" and materials to make a bomb, then carefully lead them down the path. In many of those cases, the defendants would not have had the means or ability to get the plot any further without the help of the FBI. One or two cases have been thrown out because of that.

But with this one, the people were fully capable, and had progressed to the point of getting ready to move on their plans. That makes this a very worrisome case indeed.

from the Guardian 2013 https://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/nov/22/central-african-republic-verge-of-genocide

What started as a political movement against the corrupt and autocratic Bozizé is now taking on an ominously religious character. Nearly all the Seleka are Muslim, including mercenaries from neighbouring Chad and the notorious Janjaweed from Sudan's Darfur region. An "us and them" mentality of mutual distrust and paranoia is taking root, with some Christians taking up arms in vigilante militias known as "anti-balaka" — meaning anti-sword or anti-machete — and committing atrocities of their own, giving the Seleka a pretext for yet more aggression. The spiral of violence has become a recruiting sergeant for thousands of child soldiers.

... with some Christians taking up arms in vigilante militias known as "anti-balaka" — meaning anti-sword or anti-machete — and committing atrocities of their own, giving the Seleka a pretext for yet more aggression.

U.S. DOJ news release archives are making for interesting reading - this tidbit, from earlier this week (https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/missouri-man-who-set-fire-mosque-and-who-attempted-arson-planned-parenthood-sentenced-63):

Quote

Missouri Man Who Set Fire to Mosque and Who Attempted Arson at Planned Parenthood Sentenced to 63 Months in Prison

Jedediah Stout, 32, of Joplin, Missouri, was sentenced today in the Western District of Missouri to 63 months in prison for setting fire to the Islamic Society of Joplin mosque as well as for two attempted arsons of a Planned Parenthood clinic in Joplin, announced Principal Deputy Assistant Attorney General Vanita Gupta, head of the Justice Department’s Civil Rights Division, and U.S. Attorney Tammy Dickinson of the Western District of Missouri.

Stout pleaded guilty on April 18, 2016, to a four-count information that charged him with one count of damage to the Islamic Society of Joplin mosque, two counts of arson at a Planned Parenthood facility in Joplin and one count of violating the Freedom of Access to Clinic Entrances Act. Stout was also ordered to pay $701,971 in restitution.

Stout, who told investigators that he did not like Islam as a religion, admitted in his guilty plea to setting a fire that destroyed the mosque on Aug. 6, 2012. The mosque served families from neighboring states, many of whom provided funding for the operation of the mosque. As a direct result of the fire, many donations made during the Muslim holy period of Ramadan were destroyed.

In his guilty plea, Stout also admitted to two arson attempts on Oct. 3 and Oct. 4, 2013, against the Planned Parenthood of Joplin. In both attempts, Stout threw items containing an accelerant onto the roof of the Planned Parenthood facility and then ignited material attached to the accelerant. Surveillance video captured his consecutive attempts to set the fires and Stout was apprehended soon after those attempts. Stout admitted to investigators that he was responsible for both Planned Parenthood arson attempts and for the mosque arson, and that he had committed the mosque arson using the same kind of incendiary device as in the Planned Parenthood arson attempts. Stout further admitted that he targeted Planned Parenthood because they provide reproductive health care services ...

So, playing the Devil's Advocate, if we treat this the same way as other extremist violence with links/hints of religious involvement, one has to wonder what his influences were - especially since hometown media say he identifies as "conservative Christian" (http://www.joplinglobe.com/news/local_news/joplin-man-who-torched-mosque-attempted-to-burn-planned-parenthood/article_c39da4b1-07b9-513d-98af-9cf720f3e0f1.html). Did he own any religious literature? Who was he hanging around with? Did his church do anything about this if they knew? Have anti-Muslim or anti-abortion groups spoken out against such violence? Or is this just a case of someone mentally ill?

The big difference is that you don’t have Vatican telling to kill and suppress the Muslims, nor does the Vatican or other religious authorities issue death threats for drawing cartoons of Christ.

You're right, but I haven't read anything saying he's Roman Catholic (which has a lot more centralized and agreed-to locus of control than other religions), so at that level, the Pope has nothing to uncondone here. But there have been examples of clergy advocating extreme measures in the case of people doing abortions (http://www.patheos.com/blogs/progressivesecularhumanist/2015/11/evangelist-calls-on-christians-to-assassinate-abortion-providers/).

That said, and I stand to be educated, but I'm guessing the Christian religions in the U.S. have a spectrum of "how much head office/head dude-dudette dictates what happens in the pews."

A British neo-Nazi movement is to become the first far-right group to be banned under terrorism laws in the UK.

Home Secretary Amber Rudd said National Action was "a racist, anti-Semitic and homophobic organisation".

An order laid in Parliament to proscribe the group - making it a criminal offence to join or support it - is due to come into effect on Friday.

It will be the first time a group engaged in extreme right-wing activities has been proscribed.

Under the Terrorism Act 2000, the home secretary can proscribe an organisation if it is believed to be "concerned in terrorism".

The growing problem of far-right radicalisation

National Action describes itself as a "National Socialist youth organisation" and says its movement is aimed at the "broken right-wing".

Ms Rudd said the group had "no place" in Britain.

She said: "National Action is a racist, anti-Semitic and homophobic organisation which stirs up hatred, glorifies violence and promotes a vile ideology, and I will not stand for it."

Proscription makes it a criminal offence to belong to the organisation, arrange meetings in support of the group or wear clothing or carry articles in public which arouse reasonable suspicion.

Penalties for proscription offences can be a maximum of 10 years in prison and an unlimited fine.

There are currently 70 international organisations (https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/538297/20160715-Proscription-website-update.pdf) that are proscribed under the Terrorism Act 2000 - the majority of which are Islamist groups. A further 14 organisations in Northern Ireland were proscribed under previous legislation ...

More on the group here (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Action_(UK)) (usual Wikipedia caveats apply).

The federal jury1 of 10 women and two men who found Dylann Roof guilty of federal hate crimes Thursday in the killings of nine African-Americans at a historic Charleston church now must wait more than two weeks for the trial’s next phase.

Jurors on Jan. 3 will begin to hear evidence about whether to give the death penalty or life without parole to the 22-year-old self-avowed white supremacist from Columbia.

Jurors took two hours Thursday to find him guilty. Evidence in the case had been overwhelming, including a video confession.

Federal Judge Richard Gergel told jurors that during the holiday recess, they may not look at any news accounts of one of the most sensational South Carolina trials in decades. Nor can they discuss the case with anyone — including other jurors.

The killings shook South Carolina and the nation because they happened in a church, because Roof’s white supremacist motivations were so blatant and because survivors were so quick to express forgiveness.

“These nine people exemplified a goodness that was greater than this message of hate,” prosecutor Nathan Williams told jurors earlier in closing arguments, urging them to find Roof guilty.

After the verdict, Gergel put Roof under oath and asked him one more time if he wants to represent himself in the death penalty phase. Roof said “yes.” His legal team of top defense lawyers will be classified as “stand-by” and be able only to offer him advice.

Gergel warned Roof, a ninth-grade dropout with a GED, that he should not try to handle such a task. But Roof was firm. Gergel told him he had until Jan. 3 to change his mind ...

1 -- These are the federal charges he's been found guilty of - there could be more (http://www.postandcourier.com/church_shooting/dylann-roof-found-guilty-in-emanuel-ame-church-massacre-case/article_c6b12f02-c2c9-11e6-bf62-078489dee328.html):

Quote

... The jury will return Jan. 3 to decide whether to impose death, or sentence Roof to life imprisonment.

After that, Roof is scheduled to be tried on murder charges in state court, where he also faces the prospect of a death sentence ...

"White supremacist gets 30 years prison for his plot to kill Muslims and Obama" (http://bit.ly/2hQqaUA)

Quote

A self-proclaimed white supremacist convicted on charges he planned to use a “death ray” to kill Muslims and Barack Obama was sentenced on Monday to 30 years in prison, federal prosecutors in New York said.

Glendon Scott Crawford, 52, a Navy veteran and a member of the Ku Klux Klan, was found guilty in August 2015 of conspiring with another man to build a radiation dispersal device, dubbed a “death ray” by tabloids.

Crawford is the first person to be convicted under a law barring attempts to acquire or use a radiological dispersal device, which combines conventional explosives, such as dynamite, with radioactive material. Congress passed the statute in 2004 to punish individuals who try to set off a so-called “dirty bomb.”

US district judge Gary Sharpe imposed the sentence at a hearing in Albany, prosecutors said in a statement. He was convicted on three counts, including conspiring to use a weapon of mass destruction.

Crawford, who is from upstate New York, plans to appeal the conviction as well as his sentence, his attorney Danielle Neroni said in a statement. His lawyers argued unsuccessfully at trial that he was entrapped by the government.

Crawford’s co-conspirator, Eric Feight, pleaded guilty in connection with the case and was sentenced to eight years and one month in prison.*

US prosecutors had sought life in prison for Crawford. He faced a mandatory minimum of 25 years. After his release, he will be supervised for life.

“His plot to murder people he did not know was designed to, in his oft-repeated words, ‘take his country back’ from government leaders by forcing them to change government conduct he perceived as favoring Muslims,” prosecutors wrote in a pre-sentencing court filing ...

Eric J. Feight, 55, of Hudson, New York, was sentenced today to serve 97 months in prison for providing material support to terrorists.

The sentence was announced by Assistant Attorney General for National Security John P. Carlin, U.S. Attorney Richard S. Hartunian of the Northern District of New York, and Special Agent in Charge Andrew W. Vale of the FBI’s Albany, New York, Division.

Feight pleaded guilty on January 22, 2014, and admitted to helping Glendon Scott Crawford modify an industrial-grade radiation device intended to be used to kill Muslims in the Albany area. Feight also admitted he assisted Crawford by designing and building a remote initiation unit to allow the radiation device to be activated from a distance. Both men were arrested following an extensive federal investigation. Crawford, a self-proclaimed Ku Klux Klan (KKK) member, sought financial support for his plot from the KKK, and he and Feight later met with individuals they believed to be KKK financiers to advance their scheme to kill innocent Americans. Those individuals were actually FBI agents posing as businessmen connected to the KKK who were willing to support the scheme.

“Eric Feight aided Glendon Scott Crawford in altering a dispersal device to target unsuspecting Muslim Americans with lethal doses of radiation,” said Assistant Attorney General Carlin. “Feight and Crawford’s abominable plot to harm innocent Americans was thwarted thanks to the tireless efforts of law enforcement. The National Security Division’s highest priority continues to be combatting terrorism, and we remain ready to identify, disrupt and prevent terrorist threats, both domestically and internationally.”

“The sentence today highlights both the dangers we face when hatred and bigotry beget domestic terrorism and violent extremism, and our commitment to holding those who commit such crimes accountable,” said U.S. Attorney Hartunian. “No American—of any background—should have to live in fear of this kind of attack. This case illustrates the importance of vigilance by community members and an immediate, comprehensive investigation by our Albany FBI Joint Terrorism Task Force, which thwarted the diabolical plan Feight supported. We must continue to counter messages of hate by empowering communities and emphasizing the inclusion on which our nation was founded—with local, state and federal law enforcement ready to stop any who refuse to heed that call.”

“Today’s sentencing is the result of the incredible efforts of our Joint Terrorism Task Force and the U.S. Attorney’s Office,” said Special Agent in Charge Vale. “While we enjoy today’s success, it is important that we continue to gain the strongest possible understanding to allow us to better assess the terrorism threat and identify those who would go beyond hateful rhetoric and extremist views to commit violent, criminal acts.”

This case was investigated by the Albany FBI Joint Terrorism Task Force. The case is being prosecuted by Assistant U.S. Attorneys Stephen C. Green and Richard Belliss of the Northern District of New York, and Trial Attorney Joseph Kaster of the National Security Division’s Counterterrorism Section.

The latest on the Charleston church shooter from June 2015 (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charleston_church_shooting) ....

"Dylann Roof Tells (Federal) Jury: 'I Still Feel Like I Had to Do It' " (http://abcnews.go.com/US/jurors-hear-closing-arguments-dylann-roof-trial/story?id=44673859)

"Facing death, South Carolina church gunman stands by killings" (http://www.reuters.com/article/us-south-carolina-shooting-roof-idUSKBN14U17O)

"In final argument, Roof does not ask jury to spare life" (http://www.wdsu.com/article/south-carolina-church-shooting-roof-sentence/8581405)

P.S. -- Roof is also facing a state trial for the killings, which appears to be on hold while the federal proceedings unfold (http://www.live5news.com/story/34193515/judge-state-trial-against-dylann-roof-delayed-indefinitely).

And the jury decides ...."Dylann Roof sentenced to death for church slayings" (http://www.ctvnews.ca/world/dylann-roof-sentenced-to-death-for-church-slayings-1.3233549)

That's nice, but "In 2010, a death row inmate waited an average of 178 months (roughly 15 years) between sentencing and execution."https://www.google.ca/search?q=average+time+on+deth+row&sourceid=ie7&rls=com.microsoft:en-CA:IE-Address&ie=&oe=&rlz=1I7GGHP_en-GBCA592&gfe_rd=cr&ei=b311WODrD4eN8Qe2gb7oDA&gws_rd=ssl#q=average+time+on+death+row

Assuming they don't commute it to life, like they did with Manson and Winston Moseley etc...

... DHS and FBI assess the primary factor explaining the difference in targets between foreign and US anarchist extremists is foreign anarchist extremists’ focus on specific economic and governance issues relative to their geographic area, while US anarchist extremists tend to focus on symbols of capitalism. We assess the likely primary factor explaining foreign anarchist extremists’ greater willingness to use more violent tactics than their US counterparts is that these foreign anarchist extremist movements are often more organized—allowing for more complex attacks—and have a well-established tradition of lethal violence not currently seen in the United States.

The vast majority of US anarchist extremist attacks targeted property likely due to the location’s accessibility and as a symbol of capitalism and globalization. Most foreign anarchist extremist attacks targeted persons likely because of the cohesiveness of the movement and greater emphasis on issues that can be blamed on local, individual targets. US anarchist extremists targeted the banking/finance sector most often, as these perceived soft targets of capitalism are possible to attack with tactics that are non-lethal yet cause significant economic damage and pose significant public safety risks. Foreign anarchist extremists most often targeted government entities, likely due to the emphasis placed on local domestic issues by foreign anarchist extremists and their capabilities to commit attacks against hardened targets.

Arson was the most common violent tactic used by US anarchist extremists—approximately 70 percent (19 of 27) of attacks—while foreign anarchist extremists used arson in only a third of their attacks. US anarchist extremists likely use this tactic based on their intention to cause economic and property damage, which can be accomplished by arson with relatively limited resources and specialized skills. Unlike US anarchist extremists, foreign anarchist extremists frequently used explosives, likely due to their capability to develop more advanced explosive devices as a result of their more organized structure, having a history of using such tactics, and because their targets are hardened.

…

Social Justice

Social justice issues––specifically opposition to gentrification and opposition to perceived racism and fascism––were the second most common driver of violence for US anarchist extremists, as they accounted for 26 percent (7 of 27) of attacks. Social justice issues accounted for 12 percent of violent foreign anarchist extremist attacks, although these incidents occurred only in Greece and were all against perceived fascism. Although social justice issues can motivate anarchist extremists to violence, they are often a driver for violence if a social justice issue occurs within a location that also has an anarchist extremist presence.

Social justice issues often result in legal protest activities, and historically, in both the United States and abroad, anarchist extremists have been known to co-opt legal protests as a cover to commit violence against their targets. However, a review of data in this study indicated in the seven social-justice motivated violent incidents committed by US anarchist extremists, only one of those incidents exploited otherwise legal protest activity. The reasons for this finding are currently a reporting gap ...

Toronto police arrest a home grown terrorist. Good thing too, that sign would have caused a lot of death and destruction.

https://m.liveleak.com/view?i=108_1486253318

Let's see.....The guy was a known activist. He was told not to go down the street that the protest was on. He was told not to show his sign to incite the protest. He intentionally went to a location where he pulled out his sign and with the intent to incite the protesters. He was arrested peacefully and taken away. The whole matter had nothing to do with the protest, nor Sharia, but of one idiot who was out to make a scene and got arrested. Actually a case of sensationalizing a non-event, to incite people. The police handled him in a respectful manner, even in the arrest, and no violence happened.

I still find it weird the police can order someone not to walk down a street or hold up a sign which "intices people". The sign seems hardly vitorlic. So much for being held accountable for your own actions.

I still find it weird the police can order someone not to walk down a street or hold up a sign which "intices people". The sign seems hardly vitorlic. So much for being held accountable for your own actions.

There have also been cases where people carrying Canadian flags have been told, "don't go there - you'll only make things worse."

Let's see.....The guy was a known activist. He was told not to go down the street that the protest was on. He was told not to show his sign to incite the protest. He intentionally went to a location where he pulled out his sign and with the intent to incite the protesters. He was arrested peacefully and taken away. The whole matter had nothing to do with the protest, nor Sharia, but of one idiot who was out to make a scene and got arrested.

My wife and I were just discussing how sh*thead in Quebec just handed the Islamists a free pass for the next while and tossed legal gun owners under the bus as well. I wish these guys when they get a bright idea of killing someone, they would practice on themselves first.

From earlier this week (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/benjamin-mcdowell-fbi-dylann-roof_us_58a5e7f6e4b045cd34bf9312?):

Quote

A 29-year-old white supremacist from South Carolina allegedly plotting an attack inspired by Charleston church shooter Dylann Roof was arrested by federal agents in an FBI sting this week.

His plan ran into some other logistical problems along the way: his mother wouldn’t let him use her cellphone, and he had to borrow money from his grandfather to buy a weapon from the undercover FBI agent he thought was a member of the Aryan Nations.

The FBI on Wednesday arrested Benjamin Thomas Samuel McDowell of Conway, South Carolina, in the parking lot of a Hampton Inn in Myrtle Beach after he purchased a disabled Glock and hollow point ammunition from an undercover federal agent for $109 ...

More from the U.S. DOJ (https://www.justice.gov/usao-sc/pr/conway-man-arrested-fbi-federal-gun-charge):

Quote

Conway Man Arrested by the FBI on Federal Gun Charge

Columbia, South Carolina ---- United States Attorney Beth Drake stated today that Benjamin Thomas Samuel McDowell, age 29, of Conway, South Carolina, appeared before a federal magistrate judge this morning in Florence, South Carolina, for an initial appearance following his arrest last night in Myrtle Beach by the FBI. McDowell was arrested for a violation of possession of a firearm and ammunition by a prohibited person, a violation of Title 18, United States Code, Section 922(g)(1).

A preliminary hearing and a detention hearing for McDowell have been calendared for Tuesday, February 21, 2017 at 2:30pm at the McMillan Federal Building in Florence, South Carolina. McDowell remains in custody. The case is being investigated by the FBI, the Horry County Police Department, and the Myrtle Beach Police Department.

U.S. Attorney Drake stated that all charges are merely accusations and all defendants are presumed innocent until and unless proven guilty.

I'll be honest, this thread sorta feels like a tit for tat kind of argument. So with that in mind, do you think it's at all telling that examples of Religious/Extremist Terrorism: Non-Muslim edition pop up in ones and twos yet in the last 4 days we see numbers like this from Islamic attacks?

Quote

2 hours ago - Officials in Pakistan say they have killed at least 39 suspected militants in a sweeping security crackdown a day after a massive bombing claimed by Islamic State killed 88 people and injured hundreds more at a crowded shrine

Quote

20 hours ago - At least 48 people have been killed in a car bombing in Baghdad that has been claimed by Isis

and just in general

Quote

(CNN)Since declaring its caliphate in June 2014, the self-proclaimed Islamic State has conducted or inspired more than 140 terrorist attacks in 29 countries other than Iraq and Syria, where its carnage has taken a much deadlier toll. Those attacks have killed at least 2,043 people and injured thousands more.

I'll be honest, this thread sorta feels like a tit for tat kind of argument.

(...)

Apologize if I'm off the mark with this.

I think we have the jihadi terror discussion pretty well covered (at least 50 pages here (https://army.ca/forums/index.php/topic,81276.0.html), with more on specific incidents here (https://army.ca/forums/index.php?topic=123322.0), here (https://army.ca/forums/index.php?topic=44695.75) and here (https://army.ca/forums/index.php/topic,117467.0.html), to show just a few).

Just showin' 1) it's not just one group/creed/affiliation/whatever being nasty, and 2) trying to let people see how other bad guys do things (remember the Taliban propaganda threads?).

Regardless of which flavour terrorist/******* ideology they spring from, I'm glad that they're catching those they can before they act upon their plans. My gratitude goes out to all those labouring behind the scenes at the various intelligence/security/law enforcement agencies to this end. I can well imagine the unpaid debt of gratitude I rack up on a daily basis. :salute:

This (https://goo.gl/BDSJZg) from the New York County District Attorney's office ...

Quote

DA VANCE: JAMES JACKSON INDICTED ON CHARGES OF MURDER IN THE FIRST AND SECOND DEGREES, AMONG OTHER CHARGES

Defendant Charged With Murder in the First and Second Degrees As an Act of Terrorism, Murder in the Second Degree As a Hate Crime, Among Other Charges, For Fatally Stabbing Timothy Caughman

Manhattan District Attorney Cyrus R. Vance, Jr., today announced the indictment of JAMES JACKSON, 28, for fatally stabbing 66-year-old Timothy Caughman on March 20, 2017. JACKSON is charged in New York State Supreme Court with Murder in the First and Second Degrees as an Act of Terrorism, Murder in the Second Degree as a Hate Crime, as well as three counts of Criminal Possession of a Weapon.[1]

“James Jackson prowled the streets of New York for three days in search of a black person to assassinate in order to launch a campaign of terrorism against our Manhattan community and the values we celebrate,” said District Attorney Vance. “Last week, with total presence of mind, he acted on his plan, randomly selecting a beloved New Yorker solely on the basis of his skin color, and stabbing him repeatedly and publicly on a Midtown street corner. James Jackson wanted to kill black men, planned to kill black men, and then did kill a black man. He chose Midtown as his crime scene because Manhattan is the media capital of the world, and a place where people of different races live together and love one another. We must never take for granted New York’s remarkable diversity. We must celebrate it, protect it, and refuse to let violence and hate undermine the progress we have made as a city, a state, and a nation.”

Assistant District Attorney Joan Illuzzi, Special Counsel to the District Attorney, is handling the prosecution of this case, with the assistance of Assistant District Attorneys Nicholas Penfold and Juan Abreu of Trial Bureau 80, under the supervision of Executive Assistant District Attorney John Irwin, Chief of the Trial Division.

[1] The charges contained in the indictment are merely allegations, and the defendant is presumed innocent unless and until proven guilty. All factual recitations are derived from documents filed in court and statements made on the record in court.

Defendant Information:

JAMES JACKSON, D.O.B. 5/26/1988Baltimore, MD

Charges:

Murder in the First Degree (in furtherance of an act of terrorism), a class A-I felony, one count Murder in the Second Degree as a Crime of Terrorism, a class A-I felony, one count Murder in the Second Degree as a Hate Crime, a class A-I felony, one count Criminal Possession of a Weapon in the Fourth Degree, a class A misdemeanor, three counts

The latest on the Charleston church shooter from June 2015 (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charleston_church_shooting) ....(...)P.S. -- Roof is also facing a state trial for the killings, which appears to be on hold while the federal proceedings unfold (http://www.live5news.com/story/34193515/judge-state-trial-against-dylann-roof-delayed-indefinitely).

This from an interesting Q&A with a former FBI undercover cop (https://goo.gl/XzbI3l) on radicalization ...

Quote

... Q) When you look at these kinds of white nationalist groups and you look at a group like ISIS or al Qaeda, their ideologies are very different but many of their tactics are the same. When you look at these groups, what are the biggest similarities and what are the biggest differences?

A) Absolutely. When I left the FBI I wrote a book about this called “Thinking Like a Terrorist” in which I tried to explain that terrorism is a methodology and that all the groups that use terrorism tend to follow the same strategies.

One of the things that surprised me when I went undercover was how much these groups published about their methods and motives. I expected aimless violence, anger, and hatred. Instead, they were handing me pamphlets and literature, and signing me up for newsletters. And all this stuff was open-source, partly because these organizations are clandestine. They can’t directly communicate with one another so the way they communicate is through publication. They promote broadly the methodologies they expect people to use.

A former Klansman named Louis Beam published a piece arguing that groups could no longer afford to be hierarchical because police had gotten good at tracing those hierarchies, no matter what secret methods they tried to use. Instead, people should follow a model of leaderless resistance where groups of likeminded people just come together without direct orders and participate in attacks that they expect would help further the cause.

After 9/11, when there was a focus on al Qaeda, everyone was pretending these things were brand new, but if you knew the tactics you could predict exactly each step they were going to make. And again, all this is published. If you look at the al Qaeda manual it’s really not that different from the Irish Republican Army green book or a lot of the white supremacist documents. There’s even a Brazilian Communist, Carlos Marighella, who was one of the first to put all of this on paper in the Minimanual of the Urban Guerilla.

So it was very frustrating to me in the three years after 9/11 before I left the FBI that we weren’t paying attention to those manuals, paying attention to what those tactics were, and trying to get in front of their tactics. Instead, we did what they wanted us to, which was respond emotionally in a very broad way. This helped them to expand the conflict and, as we can see almost 16 years later, we are continuing to expand that conflict across the globe, where it would have been better to respond in a much more narrowly focused way.

Following the attack on 11 April, Borussia Dortmund's home Champions League match against Monaco was rescheduled a day later, which led Dortmund fans to open their doors to stranded away supporters.

Police initially treated the blast as a terrorist attack.

However, the following week, investigators cast "significant doubt" on jihadist motivations being behind it.

They now say the attack was in fact motivated by financial greed.

Sergej W, 28, would have made about €3.9m euros ($4.2m; £3.2m) from his actions, Germany's Bild newspaper reported.

In a statement on Friday (in German), the German federal prosecutor's office said he has German and Russian nationality.

He was arrested on Friday near Tubingen in Rottenburg, south-west Germany.

The suspect had allegedly bought 15,000 put options on Borussia Dortmund shares - reportedly priced at €78,000 (£65,000; $83,600) - betting that they would drop sharply after the attack.

He would have made large profits if the team's share price collapsed.

Experts have likened the alleged plot to a sophisticated form of insider trading - because he tried to use information not widely available to the public to make money quickly.

He was staying at the team's L'Arrivée hotel in Dortmund on the day of the attack and had moved to a room on the top floor, overlooking the street where it took place, prosecutors say.

The suspect placed the bet on 11 April using an IP address traced to the hotel, after taking out a loan for the money.

What are put options?

A put option on a share or other asset is a contract, which allows an investor to sell the asset at an agreed price, on an agreed day in the future

If the market price falls before then, the investor can then buy the asset more cheaply on the open market and sell it at the higher, option price to whoever sold the option. The investor pockets the price difference

Investigators believe three explosive devices packed with metal pins were hidden in a hedge and set off as the bus passed.

The bus was damaged about six miles from the Westfalenstadion - officially called Signal Iduna Park - in Dortmund about 90 minutes before kick-off.

Pictures from the scene showed its windows broken and its tyres burst.

Police have arrested a German soldier who had posed as a Syrian refugee on suspicion he was planning an attack, apparently motivated by anti-foreigner sentiment, in a case that prosecutors said Thursday was “more than strange.”

The officer, who was “of German background” and stationed in France, allegedly stashed a loaded pistol in a bathroom at the Vienna airport that was discovered, leading Austrian authorities to take him into temporary custody when he went to retrieve it in February, Niesen said.

Though under investigation in Austria, authorities there did not keep him in custody and he was arrested in southern Germany on Wednesday.

A 24-year-old student from the soldier’s hometown of Offenbach was also arrested ...

"A man fatally stabbed two passengers aboard a Portland, Oregon, commuter train after they tried to stop him from harassing two young women who appeared to be Muslim, police said on Saturday. Police identified the assailant, who was arrested soon after the Friday afternoon attack, as Jeremy Joseph Christian of Portland, a 35-year-old convicted felon ..." (http://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-muslims-portland-idUSKBN18N080) (Reuters)

" Portland man accused of fatal train stabbing has outburst in court -- Jeremy Joseph Christian, accused of killing two men as they shielded a woman from his anti-Muslim tirade, shouted: ‘You call it terrorism, I call it patriotism!’ ..." (https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2017/may/30/portland-stabbing-anti-muslim-jeremy-joseph-christian-court) (UK's The Guardian)

(I stand to be corrected, based on better reading of the source material than just Google Translate, but ...) Swedish media report that some men charged with the bombing of a refugee shelter in February (https://www.thelocal.se/20170203/swedish-neo-nazis-held-over-gothenburg-refugee-centre-blast) (as well as several other attempted bombings) reportedly received para-military training in Russia by Russian far-rightists alleged to be Russian reserve military officers. The public prosecutor says there's no indication that the nationalist/white supremecist group the three were associated with -- the Nordic Resistance Movement (NRM) (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nordic_Resistance_Movement)* -- was involved in the bombing (in fact, it looks like the three acted on their own because the group wasn't militant enough). Although a statement from the public prosecutor's office says the crime was "politically motivated", the media story says it's not being treated as a terror crime because of the lack of NRM involvement.

Original source material here (https://goo.gl/9rG0R6) (media story in Swedish) and here (https://goo.gl/XT2LZ4) (public prosecutor's statement in Swedish) - both attached w/Google English translations.

Next it'll be the Judean People's Front getting militant. Or is that the People's Front of Judea? I can never get those splitters straight. ;D

Some of these group names DO have that feel, don't they?

Meanwhile, two more open source updates from New Jersey's Dep't of Homeland Security ...

"Anti-fascist groups, or “Antifa,” are a subset of the anarchist movement and focus on issues involving racism, sexism, and anti-Semitism, as well as other perceived injustices ..." (https://goo.gl/Kf4FC2)

"To appeal to new audiences susceptible to its radical messaging, the national white supremacist movement has tried to deemphasize hate symbols and attacks against non-white communities ..." (https://goo.gl/y9RgzQ)

NOTE: Not found guilty of terror offences, but the US Attorney's Office statement (https://goo.gl/MG8CLN) does say "The defendant solicited people to commit acts of violence in an effort to terrorize a community ..."

Quote

On Wednesday, June 14, 2017, Robert Doggart, 65, of Signal Mountain, Tennessee, was sentenced by the Honorable Curtis L. Collier, Senior U.S. District Judge, to serve 235 months in prison for soliciting another person to violate federal civil rights laws by burning down a mosque in Islamberg, a hamlet outside Hancock, New York. Upon his release from prison, he will be supervised by the U.S. Probation Office for three years. Doggart was also found guilty of soliciting another person to commit arson.

Evidence presented at trial established that, in February 2015, the FBI learned through a confidential source that Doggart was recruiting people online to carry out an armed attack on Islamberg, a community that is home to a large Muslim population. Doggart arranged to meet with the confidential source in Nashville, where he discussed details of his plan to burn down a mosque, a school, and a cafeteria in Islamberg. He showed the confidential source maps of Islamberg, laid out the number of guns and types of ammunition they would need to destroy the community, and discussed different ways to burn down a mosque and other buildings. Through a court order, the FBI also began intercepting Doggart’s phone calls, during which he solicited and recruited people to join him in his attack on Islamberg.

Doggart specifically targeted the mosque because it was a religious building and he discussed burning it down or blowing it up with a Molotov cocktail or other explosive device. At trial, the jury heard recorded conversations in which Doggart repeatedly discussed killing people, including one in which Doggart said, “I don’t want to have to kill children, but there’s always collateral damage.”

“People of all faiths have the fundamental right to worship freely, and this administration will not tolerate attempts to violate that right,” said Attorney General Jeff Sessions. “The defendant solicited people to commit acts of violence in an effort to terrorize a community simply because of its Islamic faith. The Justice Department will continue to aggressively investigate and prosecute attacks against our faith-based communities.”

“The people of the Eastern District of Tennessee will not tolerate the type of threats and actions perpetrated by Doggart. The United States Attorney’s Office will aggressively prosecute those who seek to disrupt the safety of our community and others,” said U.S. Attorney Nancy Stallard Harr.

Special Agent in Charge Renae McDermott of the Knoxville Division of the Federal Bureau of Investigation states that, “We are committed to investigating violations of federal civil rights statues. We prioritize civil rights investigations which are designed to protect all persons.”

The case was investigated by the FBI, Knoxville Division. Trial Attorney Saeed A. Mody of the Civil Rights Division, Assistant U.S. Attorney Perry H. Piper of the Eastern District of Tennessee, and Trial Attorney Clement McGovern of the National Security Division’s Counterterrorism Section, represented the United States at trial.

A bit more on this case from local (Chattanooga, TN) media:

"Tennessee man who planned attack against Muslim community sentenced to 20 years in prison" (http://www.timesfreepress.com/news/local/story/2017/jun/14/robert-doggart-sentenced-20-years-prison/433360/)

Looks like a white dude drove a car into a crowd of worshippers exiting a mosque. The mosque in question has a history, about twelve + years back, of having been identified as a hotbed of extremism, and carries a certain notoriety as a result. It looks like the governance of the mosque changed over completely in 2005, though I cannot speak to how it is currently. That said it would have been an obvious target for someone doing a surface Google search of a way to target Muslims in London.

At first glance, and obviously subject to all the normal breaking news caveats, it appears that we have an 'eye for an eye' reprisal- a terror attack against innocent civilians in reprisal for terrorist attacks against innocent civilians. This is of course as despicable and evil as any other such attack.

Sadly, disappointingly, and unsurprisingly I'm already seeing some real sacks of crap spouting off about 'karma' and 'reap what you sow' and such. As someone whose life is dedicated to protecting the innocent, that disgusts me.

I saw the report on the news. I'm not going to bother in the least, including reading about it until the police investigation is ended and he is charged or freed. There's so much bullshit in the news today. When even CNN is flat out caught staging lies for the cameras, journalism is no longer something to pay attention to. Editorial or journalisic opinion is just that, opinion. Just like mine. Might be true, but increasingly it appears not to be. They've moved from being news reporters and journalists to storytellers and entertainers.

We don't even get it right here on Milnet. A guy hit pedestrians and because it 'appears' similar to attacks carried out by muslim terrorists, it automatically goes here in a terrorism thread. What if he had a medical problem or was texting. Nope, just like know it all journalists, we've already decided it was a planned attack. Like I've said, I'm not concerning myself until I hear it from sources I think I trust. YMMV.

Let's face it, a lot of people are getting that sinking feeling in our hearts that this is a targeted attack.

I haven't been posting here much to be honest, because I can not seem to reliably connect to the site via my phone.. and my time frame seems to get forever extended regarding joining.

But I will be one of the most relieved people in the world if this turns out to have happened due to a medical reason or even if the guy was driving drunk and it was an accident. Because that will mean that we will not have to worry about reprisal attacks etc, because i think once that gate opens it will be hard to close. But, I have reservations.. for good reasons.

Such as a teen being murdered. But it is not counted as terrorism.https://www.washingtonpost.com/local/fairfax-loudoun-police-searching-for-missing-17-year-old-reported-to-have-been-assaulted/2017/06/18/02e379ac-5466-11e7-a204-ad706461fa4f_story.html

Or the Portland event, Quebec event etc etc etc a list from the oh so reliable wikipedia.. has a suprising amount of instances of attacks against Muslims.. which sadly makes me think this was intentional.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islamophobic_incidents

But one thing I am noticing is.. we make these idiots sound far more glorious then they deserve. Terrorist and extremist are pejorative terms to us.. but it seems the label 'terrorist' is desired to the idiots attracted to these things. So I hope the media stops using the term and refers to them as 'Mentally Handicapped Individuals' or some other demeaning term. Woops i got off on a tangent sorry.

An online friend of mine is a cop in London allegedly and I have no reason not to believe him.. but hearing about Greenfell tower, the idiotic isis inspired fools and now this.. them poor boys are having it rough lately. My friend told me the day after the fire happened you could smell burnt flesh in the air..

Sorry I will stop now, the medication I am on has me extremely loopy. But basically I can't wait for mankind to collectively grow the heck up and stop killing ourselves.. it is about dang time.

Abdullah

P.s I try to stay out of this thread and not turn it into a tit for tat thread. That is not my intention with my post.. it is just my heart breaks because of what these poor lads in england have been going through.

I saw the report on the news. I'm not going to bother in the least, including reading about it until the police investigation is ended and he is charged or freed. There's so much bullshit in the news today. When even CNN is flat out caught staging lies for the cameras, journalism is no longer something to pay attention to. Editorial or journalisic opinion is just that, opinion. Just like mine. Might be true, but increasingly it appears not to be. They've moved from being news reporters and journalists to storytellers and entertainers.

We don't even get it right here on Milnet. A guy hit pedestrians and because it 'appears' similar to attacks carried out by muslim terrorists, it automatically goes here in a terrorism thread. What if he had a medical problem or was texting. Nope, just like know it all journalists, we've already decided it was a planned attack. Like I've said, I'm not concerning myself until I hear it from sources I think I trust. YMMV.

The police declared it a terror attack eight minutes after the incident. The country's counter terrorism unit has taken over the investigation. In their opinion they declared it as such. If the sources you trust didn't report that, then I would question your sources...

... A guy hit pedestrians and because it 'appears' similar to attacks carried out by muslim terrorists, it automatically goes here in a terrorism thread. What if he had a medical problem or was texting. Nope, just like know it all journalists, we've already decided it was a planned attack ...

London's Metro Police had this to say (http://news.met.police.uk/news/incident-in-seven-sisters-road-247036):

Quote

... No matter what the motivation proves to be, and we are keeping an open mind, this is being treated as a terrorist attack and the Counter Terrorism Command is investigating ...

You're right that it hasn't been proven to be a terrorist attack yet, but if your theory in yellow turns out to be the case, I'm pretty certain that information'll be shared here, too.

As I said, I'm surprised to some degree that a reciprocal attack hasn't happened before this as no doubt there are elements from society who are equally as sick and twisted. I suspect the only reason it's not come to this until now is I expect they aren't as willing to die in the act as their end motivations are different and leaving pigs heads or paint was enough up to now. I agree with Brihard and Abdullah, attacking innocent people is disgusting. I hope this doesn't encourage more of the same tit for tat crap should this be a genuine attack and not another cause.

It appears our questions earlier have been put to be. That was indeed a retaliatory terror attack against Muslims by a white Briton. The BBC article has quite a bit of detail. The PM and the Met Police commissioner have clearly identified this as terrorism and an attack on Muslims. Witnesses on scene report that after the driver was detained he said he wanted to kill Muslims, and said he 'did his bit', and told them to kill him. Police will be getting a mental health assessment on him. Somewhat confusingly, it looks like there was already first aid being provided on a man who was in medical distress on scene, and then the van hit them. That is believed to be the lone fatality, and police are investigating whether the collision was part of the cause of death.

http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-london-40322960

I suspect that like many other attacks, we will find that this individual fits into my 'radicalized loser' theory- he's probably a failure in his own right, quite likely not all there upstairs, and probably sought meaning in an otherwise meaningless life.

... I suspect that like many other attacks, we will find that this individual fits into my 'radicalized loser' theory- he's probably a failure in his own right, quite likely not all there upstairs, and probably sought meaning in an otherwise meaningless life.

That article gives us practically nothing to go on to make those assessments. White dude, middle aged, from Wales. It doesn't establish with any degree of confidence his state of mind, his sanity, or how he may have been radicalized. It tries to draw an inference based on their being racist nationalist groups in the same area, but of course all of the U.K. is quite small with significant population density. You'll find nationalist groups close to anywhere.

That article gives us practically nothing to go on to make those assessments. White dude, middle aged, from Wales. It doesn't establish with any degree of confidence his state of mind, his sanity, or how he may have been radicalized. It tries to draw an inference based on their being racist nationalist groups in the same area, but of course all of the U.K. is quite small with significant population density. You'll find nationalist groups close to anywhere.

Definitely not enough info to go on to make any judgement on state of mind or even social bearing.

There's no evidence in the piece connecting the individual with any group, but there's still an interesting narrative tidbit to stay tuned for in the coming days ...

Quote

... Several far right groups are active in south Wales, in the vicinity of Pontyclun where Osborne is believed to have hired the van used in the attack. They include the South Wales National Front. Its leader, Adam Lloyd, is based in Bridgend, but it has denied any connection to the attacker.

Lloyd, the SWNF organiser, denied any connection to the attacker.

“The man in question is not known to any of us here in South Wales National Front, and to our knowledge is not and never has been a member,” he said.

“Although we will never condone or accept this kind of violent attacks here in SWNF, anyone with a right mind can see this is not a terrorist attack but a revenge attack.” ...

Definition of "revenge" (https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/revenge): "the act of doing something to hurt someone because that person did something that hurt you"

No, I'm resting my case that even the MSM isn't sure of what's going on, but it's not stopping them from trying to be first with the headline. So much so, that their speculation and reporting is doing nothing but muddying the waters. And the readers of their fluff are falling all over themselves agreeing/ denying/ going off on their own wild tangents and arguments.

I don't even know how you twisted what I said into support for the person responsible for what happened or what anyone else in the press has to say. I am on no side. Not the driver's or the muslims' or the white supremacists' or any here. I have my own thoughts, but I'll keep them to myself until I decide I have enough for a solid assessment.

There is still too much unexplained and uncorroborated 'evidence' to be drawing conclusions at this point. Until the veracity of everything that took place is known, there is no reasonable or probable grounds to form an opinion of what happened beyond a white guy drove a truck into a group of muslims.

No, I'm resting my case that even the MSM isn't sure of what's going on, but it's not stopping them from trying to be first with the headline. So much so, that their speculation and reporting is doing nothing but muddying the waters. And the readers of their fluff are falling all over themselves agreeing/ denying/ going off on their own wild tangents and arguments.

I don't even know how you twisted what I said into support for the person responsible for what happened or what anyone else in the press has to say. I am on no side. Not the driver's or the muslims' or the white supremacists' or any here. I have my own thoughts, but I'll keep them to myself until I decide I have enough for a solid assessment.

There is still too much unexplained and uncorroborated 'evidence' to be drawing conclusions at this point. Until the veracity of everything that took place is known, there is no reasonable or probable grounds to form an opinion of what happened beyond a white guy drove a truck into a group of muslims.

To be honest I don't blame your skepticism. But the media is going with what they are being told. If the London police says "we are treating this as a terrorist attack" what do you expect the narrative to be? That part, the part that states what the police said is a fact whether you believe it or not. Fake news is indeed fake news. News that gets it wrong doesn't always equate to fake. No one here is running wild with anything despite you thinking that opinions are being formed based on what the media is saying.

I also didn't twist anything you said. You rested your case after someone posted the opinion of a white supremacist. I thought that was odd.

You said you have trusted sources that someone else here was curious about that you were waiting on. I'd also like to know what those trusted sources are. If anything I do like to expand the various forums and less sources I go to. I'm legitimately asking, it's not to call you out or anything but I'd like to know what a skeptic's trusted news sources are.

White people can be Muslim too. Some of the most vitriolic dudes I've came across on youtube were white converts.

It's interesting to see side by side pictures of comments from twitter comparing what people say when it's a terrorist attack committed by Muslims against when one is carried out by a non-Muslim.

White people are what anthropologists call "Caucasians". Quite a few Muslims, particularly in the Middle East, Eurasia, Northern Africa and Southwest Asia are "Caucasians". It is quite humourous when it comes to people using "racism" in their argument on this subject.

Back on topic. What we have is a nut job, just like the one who shot the Republican members of Congress practicing at the ballpark. There are thousands out there, in every nation. I am not sure if I would label this case as one of terrorism over a case of assault. I look at it as a case where someone wanted to retaliate to "terrorism" at the first target they saw. More of an case of assault with a deadly weapon than a terrorist act. We shall see what comes out in Court, when that day comes, as to what his motives really were, and whether they were planned or just spur of the moment.

I also think that there is a great difference between terrorism and terrorizing. Our concept of "terrorists" is that they conduct "terrorism"; but "criminals" have also been known to "terrorize". For example: the Hells Angels have not been branded as a "terrorist group", yet they have been known to "terrorize" segments of our society.

Treating it as a terrorist incident and knowing it is are two different things. Police can treat near anything as a terrorist incident. It allows for special powers when someone is suspected of it. No time limit to hold them, legal privileges suspended etc. It's actually pretty common IIRC. They can always downgrade the charges later when they know more about what's going on. Treating it as a terrorism act allows them to hold the suspect where he'd normally be freed on bail. That's what I see. YMMV.

At any rate, that's as far as I'm going, with this, until I see something concrete.

But your statement about this reads as though you blamed the media for the narrative when in fact it is the police who started it. The media went with what the police told them. You can't blame them for that.

I'm all for calling out the media when they are wrong but maybe you should blame the police for starting this.

Until the veracity of everything that took place is known, there is no reasonable or probable grounds to form an opinion of what happened beyond a white guy drove a truck into a group of muslims.

The Brits have a similar threshold for charging criminal offences as us- in our case we quite literlaly use the term 'reasonable and probable grounds'. In this case the attacker has been charged with at least one terrorism offense. So it appears that yes, actually, there ARE reasonable and probable grounds to form the opinion that a terrorism act took place - at least in the mind of British police and crown prosecutors. I don't know what weight you give to their opinion in this matter, but in my mind it ought to be a lot. You don't just slap terrorism charges willy nilly on top of already very solid criminal cases.

The guy attacked Muslims, stated his desire to kill Muslims, and claimed to have 'done his bit'. He was attacking a whole people based on their religious views in an apparent tit for tat. If this doesn't fit your concept of 'terrorism', you need to revise. I am saddened but not surprised at the contortions some people are going to to call this something other than what it appears to be, who otherwise if the attacker were Muslim would be very quickly on that particular train.

But your statement about this reads as though you blamed the media for the narrative when in fact it is the police who started it. The media went with what the police told them. You can't blame them for that.

I'm all for calling out the media when they are wrong but maybe you should blame the police for starting this.

Not the media and certainly not the people here.

Not blaming anyone here, whatever you meant by that. I don't care what they write or perceive, didn't even read most of it. Do whatever you want. Think whatever you want. I'll do likewise. Nobody says you have to listen to me or even agree. As far as what I should or shouldn't do, you don't get to decide any of that. Again, unless there's new info, the police said they were TREATING as a terrorist attack, not that it was a terrorist act, for the reasons I already stated. As far as I know, they haven't come out and made that point definite yet. It's an easily missed point but a valid one and it's not picking flyshit out of pepper. The police are usually very picky and particular about the way they word things for the public. Journalists, not so much. You'll have to live with this answer as I'm not discussing my POV until I have better info. You can do as you wish. Just because I may not agree with you or someone else, doesn't mean I'm wrong or my perceptions are skewed. It means I can think for myself and not worry what anyone else thinks or says, unless I wish to.You should try it. ;) :peace:out

Not blaming anyone here, whatever you meant by that. I don't care what they write or perceive, didn't even read most of it. Do whatever you want. Think whatever you want. I'll do likewise. Nobody says you have to listen to me or even agree. As far as what I should or shouldn't do, you don't get to decide any of that. Again, unless there's new info, the police said they were TREATING as a terrorist attack, not that it was a terrorist act, for the reasons I already stated. As far as I know, they haven't come out and made that point definite yet. It's an easily missed point but a valid one and it's not picking flyshit out of pepper. The police are usually very picky and particular about the way they word things for the public. Journalists, not so much. You'll have to live with this answer as I'm not discussing my POV until I have better info. You can do as you wish. Just because I may not agree with you or someone else, doesn't mean I'm wrong or my perceptions are skewed. It means I can think for myself and not worry what anyone else thinks or says, unless I wish to.You should try it. ;) :peace:out

Hey fill your boots. I haven't made any claims lol. You admitted to not reading anything about it so I get that you thought the narrative was started by the media and not the police. I'll let your last swipe at me there pass as it just proves what I was saying.

The Brits have a similar threshold for charging criminal offences as us- in our case we quite literlaly use the term 'reasonable and probable grounds'. In this case the attacker has been charged with at least one terrorism offense. So it appears that yes, actually, there ARE reasonable and probable grounds to form the opinion that a terrorism act took place - at least in the mind of British police and crown prosecutors. I don't know what weight you give to their opinion in this matter, but in my mind it ought to be a lot. You don't just slap terrorism charges willy nilly on top of already very solid criminal cases.

The guy attacked Muslims, stated his desire to kill Muslims, and claimed to have 'done his bit'. He was attacking a whole people based on their religious views in an apparent tit for tat. If this doesn't fit your concept of 'terrorism', you need to revise. I am saddened but not surprised at the contortions some people are going to to call this something other than what it appears to be, who otherwise if the attacker were Muslim would be very quickly on that particular train.

The Brits have a similar threshold for charging criminal offences as us- in our case we quite literlaly use the term 'reasonable and probable grounds'. In this case the attacker has been charged with at least one terrorism offense. So it appears that yes, actually, there ARE reasonable and probable grounds to form the opinion that a terrorism act took place - at least in the mind of British police and crown prosecutors. I don't know what weight you give to their opinion in this matter, but in my mind it ought to be a lot. You don't just slap terrorism charges willy nilly on top of already very solid criminal cases.

The guy attacked Muslims, stated his desire to kill Muslims, and claimed to have 'done his bit'. He was attacking a whole people based on their religious views in an apparent tit for tat. If this doesn't fit your concept of 'terrorism', you need to revise. I am saddened but not surprised at the contortions some people are going to to call this something other than what it appears to be, who otherwise if the attacker were Muslim would be very quickly on that particular train.

I resent the fact that you imply that I'm going through contortions to excuse the guy for what he did. That's asinine and idiotic and well beneath you. You spoke directly to me in your post, for all of your post, so I have to believe your last comment was also made to me. I want you to show me where I defended his actions. All I said was to wait for the police and trial for the real facts and not believe everything you hear or read from the news. Nice prejudging though, which is my whole point and has been all along. Thanks much for proving it for me. :salute:

I also don't spend all day going through newspaper and newscast to stay intimate in my timing with released facts. I'm more than aware of what reasonable and probable grounds are. I was investigating for them, before you became a Queen's Cowboy.

I simply wasn't aware they'd laid a charge on him for terrorism. Like I say, I'm not glued to the story like others are. So, if that's what they did, I'm OK with that, so I'm not the one getting twisted around the axle over this. ;) If it turns out he's judged a terrorist, I'm fine with that too and if he gets a maximum sentence, I'm also ok with that. I'm just saying, we've got a live one finally, let's make sure he's given his chance at reasonable doubt and that all his rights are afforded. All the bases need covering on this one. Can't afford a mistrial on a stupid, forgotten rule of some sort. Or because a press leak compromises something. He doesn't need to be tried by journalistic perception. No different than any other of the bombers or truck attacks. The only difference is the others always die before we can get to them. This one didn't and it can't be ****ed up with rumours, innuendo or leaks. It needs to be air tight. What is the fault in that?

In MOST cases I believe what the police tell me and I'll take it at face value. Journalists, editors and owners of newspaper and electronic news media, not so much. That's a personal preference and one that I'll stick to until I see otherwise. You are free to think what you wish and I won't attempt to dissuade you. Please respect my choice to not believe the media. And really that's what started all this, I said I don't trust the media to get it right. Somehow, it's turned, falsely, into that I'm a cheerleader for the guy. None of us, except for a few, are journalists or reporters or whatever and look how all this turned on its head with this little group. Imagine millions of people getting it wrong because of the way a news outlet reported it. THAT is what I've been saying. Sorry to disappoint. You'll have to find another punching bag.

Hey fill your boots. I haven't made any claims lol. You admitted to not reading anything about it so I get that you thought the narrative was started by the media and not the police. I'll let your last swipe at me there pass as it just proves what I was saying.

Again, you are twisting facts to suit your narrative. I never said I didn't read anything about it. I said I didn't read most of the responses here. Nice try though. See you later.

I resent the fact that you imply that I'm going through contortions to excuse the guy for what he did. That's asinine and idiotic and well beneath you. You spoke directly to me in your post, for all of your post, so I have to believe your last comment was also made to me. I want you to show me where I defended his actions. All I said was to wait for the police and trial for the real facts and not believe everything you hear or read from the news. Nice prejudging though, which is my whole point and has been all along. Thanks much for proving it for me. :salute:

I also don't spend all day going through newspaper and newscast to stay intimate in my timing with released facts. I'm more than aware of what reasonable and probable grounds are. I was investigating for them, before you became a Queen's Cowboy.

I simply wasn't aware they'd laid a charge on him for terrorism. Like I say, I'm not glued to the story like others are. So, if that's what they did, I'm OK with that, so I'm not the one getting twisted around the axle over this. ;) If it turns out he's judged a terrorist, I'm fine with that too and if he gets a maximum sentence, I'm also ok with that. I'm just saying, we've got a live one finally, let's make sure he's given his chance at reasonable doubt and that all his rights are afforded. All the bases need covering on this one. Can't afford a mistrial on a stupid, forgotten rule of some sort. Or because a press leak compromises something. He doesn't need to be tried by journalistic perception. No different than any other of the bombers or truck attacks. The only difference is the others always die before we can get to them. This one didn't and it can't be ****ed up with rumours, innuendo or leaks. It needs to be air tight. What is the fault in that?

In MOST cases I believe what the police tell me and I'll take it at face value. Journalists, editors and owners of newspaper and electronic news media, not so much. That's a personal preference and one that I'll stick to until I see otherwise. You are free to think what you wish and I won't attempt to dissuade you. Please respect my choice to not believe the media. And really that's what started all this, I said I don't trust the media to get it right. Somehow, it's turned, falsely, into that I'm a cheerleader for the guy. None of us, except for a few, are journalists or reporters or whatever and look how all this turned on its head with this little group. Imagine millions of people getting it wrong because of the way a news outlet reported it. THAT is what I've been saying. Sorry to disappoint. You'll have to find another punching bag.

I didn't spend all day following the story either. I spent about five minutes on Google to catch up with the day's events- less time than it would have taken you to write your last couple posts expressing your vehement non-commital on this one. The stories about him being charged with a terrorism offense appear to have come out this morning.

At no point did I claim you defended his actions. Don't be silly. I would never accuse you or another member of this board of something like that. I also should have made sure my post clearly took a step back from addressing you directly to reference the contortions people are going through to avoid calling this terrorism, and for that I apologize. I have seen that all over the place though, where there isn't simply a marked silence, and I fin that noteworthy- a lot of those who are first in the 'kick 'em all out' crowd are quiet on this one. While I find you surprisingly and uncharacteristically vocal on not committing to a point of view on this one at this stage, I wasn't aiming that part of my post squarely at you. I'm still surprised by the lengths you went to to make sure we all knew that you weren't comfortable seeing this called terrorism yet- I've never seen you push that angle that hard on any prior attacks. It's not an accusation, just an observation.

I believe you said this in reply 57: I'm not going to bother in the least, including reading about it until the police investigation is ended and he is charged or freed.

:dunno:

OK, you win. Game over.

I'm not putting you on ignore but I'm finished conversing with you.

Yup, taking my ball and going home. Better things to do that spar back and forth with someone that wants to parse every sentence looking for ways I`ve slipped up. I am not required to answer every question posed to me on these boards. I`ll enter and exit threads and conversations as I see fit. Right now, my time is too limited to bother explaining my every word to you. Don`t take it personal, you are not the only one in the boat.

I didn't spend all day following the story either. I spent about five minutes on Google to catch up with the day's events- less time than it would have taken you to write your last couple posts expressing your vehement non-commital on this one. The stories about him being charged with a terrorism offense appear to have come out this morning.

At no point did I claim you defended his actions. Don't be silly. I would never accuse you or another member of this board of something like that. I also should have made sure my post clearly took a step back from addressing you directly to reference the contortions people are going through to avoid calling this terrorism, and for that I apologize. I have seen that all over the place though, where there isn't simply a marked silence, and I fin that noteworthy- a lot of those who are first in the 'kick 'em all out' crowd are quiet on this one. While I find you surprisingly and uncharacteristically vocal on not committing to a point of view on this one at this stage, I wasn't aiming that part of my post squarely at you. I'm still surprised by the lengths you went to to make sure we all knew that you weren't comfortable seeing this called terrorism yet- I've never seen you push that angle that hard on any prior attacks. It's not an accusation, just an observation.

Here`s another observation, and why I`m pushing for his rights.

This one is ALIVE. How many times do we get that chance. Who cares about the dead ones, whatever their beliefs and religious convictions. We can say whatever we want about them. This one is alive and it has to be done properly. Flip side, I`m surprised that you are considering him guilty as charged without seeing the evidence and deciding he`s a terrorist based on what you`ve heard. Because he was charged with a terror offence, doesnt mean he`s going to be convicted as one, and you know that. Capture one of the muslim truckers alive and I`ll say the same thing. If he died, too bad, call him whatever you want. As to me pushing my angle I`ve been far less vocal on the threads about muslim terrorists than others have, so Im not putting that mantle on even if you want me to wear it.

I just want the guy to have a fair trial as I would for anyone that goes before the bench. Muslim terrorists included. And all I`m hoping for is that we can learn something thatll serve us down the road. All Im asking for is a clean trial without all the journalistic sensationalism and guessing.

I`m not trying to be an *******, but I`m done with this. I don`t need to defend my position to anyone here. The MSM is biased and not beyond stretching the truth to further their own agenda. I dont care what Jimmy Olsen thinks. I want him to give me the facts, clinically, and keep his opinion to himself.

And just so everyone is clear, I don`t give a frig if the guy is a purple skinned worshiper of the sun god Ra. He`s, because alive and charged, entitled to all the fairness we can provide, without the speculation of the media. I wouldn`t be surprised if the Judge puts a blackout on media coverage. I`ve simply decided, that because he`s alive and being brought before justice, I would rather wait and hear what is said at trial, instead of what CNN decides to say. I don`t know how else to put it. Save your breath if you still think I`m wrong, because that is the last I`m speaking of my personal decision. It`s all there, nothing else to say on it.

And if you think I`m being racist because the guy is white and I want him to have a fair trial, I am the moderator that has kicked white supremacists and racially prejudiced people off of this site, when no one else would, so don`t even consider going down that road.

I tend to agree that this is not a terrorist act. Now before you start flaming, consider this: the purpose of a terrorist act is to terrorise, that is to instil fear in a group or a person in order to either dominate or drive them away. This chap does not appear to have any such motives. From what little I have been able to gather from the press, he simply wanted to murder and his murderous rage was targeted at a particular group of people i.e. Muslims which would make this, imho a racist attack motivated by bigotry. The term terrorist is vastly overused and needs to be reserved for those who are trying to terrorise otherwise its import is lessened significantly and that is perhaps not so good

I tend to agree that this is not a terrorist act. Now before you start flaming, consider this: the purpose of a terrorist act is to terrorise, that is to instil fear in a group or a person in order to either dominate or drive them away. This chap does not appear to have any such motives.

Not sure I agree here. He went out of his way to rent a vehicle, and drive 150 miles in the middle of the night from Cardiff to London in order to attack one of the most "iconic" mosques in the UK to carry out this crime. See info r.e. Finsbury Park mosque: http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/finsbury-park-mosque-terror-attack-latest-abu-hamza-changed-since-won-awards-for-community-relations-a7798171.html

What I think we can all agree on is the use of the term "terrorism" is problematic in many cases - and this applies to attacks carried out by radicals of all stripes.

was targeted at a particular group of people i.e. Muslims which would make this, imho a racist attack motivated by bigotry.

Muslim (devout followers of Islam) isn't a race.

Quote

The term terrorist is vastly overused and needs to be reserved for those who are trying to terrorise otherwise its import is lessened significantly and that is perhaps not so good

Terrorism usually seems to be (or is made out to be?) synonymous with middle eastern/muslim attack when I'm sure we can agree anyone can be a terrorist. In this guys case I too wonder if it would fit the (or a) definition or terrorist. If he wanted to terrorize a specific community then he probably succeeded but was it on behalf of some political/religious/anti-government bigger picture or did he just want to kill people because he was angry.

... If he wanted to terrorize a specific community then he probably succeeded but was it on behalf of some political/religious/anti-government bigger picture or did he just want to kill people because he was angry.

Good point - apart from the fact that being angry doesn't excuse killing ;D All the evidence is not in, by any means, but if we look at radicalization for one group of bad guys/actors as a source of anger & momentum, how about with other bad guys/actors? Don't know what this guy read/was exposed to, but it might be a factor - it appears to have been in at least some non-Muslim attacks (https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/post-nation/wp/2016/08/22/prosecutors-say-accused-charleston-church-gunman-self-radicalized-online/?utm_term=.c3f7024c1dbc). It helps to know the why to figure out ways to prevent more from sprouting.

Another potential source of anger for idiots going full idiot discussed in other threads is government action (http://army.ca/forums/index.php/topic,125203.50.html). Could that be seen as "radicalizing"? Is that any mitigation? Not to me, but there may be a range of opinion on that.

I agree with that jmt. My biggest problem with the use of terrorist/terrorism is that terrorism is a tactic not an actual enemy.

By calling someone a terrorist we basically dehumanize them and act as if the organizations they represent aren't rational actors.

Some people who carry out these attacks aren't rational but the brainpower behind ISIS/Al Qaeda, etc is.

The term and current connotation has been around for awhile. If you were around then, we considered and called Carlos the Jackal, the Red Brigade, the Baader-Meinhof gang and Black September terrorists and terrorist organizations. And yes, there was some pretty smart cookies in those groups also. I'm wondering if there is much difference between a self radicalized guy in his mom's basement with a mid level ISIS fighter. Both are bombing for allah and using terror as their weapon. Both are radicalized to the same end, armed the same and have the same goal. I'm sure we would look at mental capacity if we could get one alive, but until such time, if it walks like a duck............

The term and current connotation has been around for awhile. If you were around then, we considered and called Carlos the Jackal, the Red Brigade, the Baader-Meinhof gang and Black September terrorists and terrorist organizations. And yes, there was some pretty smart cookies in those groups also. I'm wondering if there is much difference between a self radicalized guy in his mom's basement with a mid level ISIS fighter. Both are bombing for allah and using terror as their weapon. Both are radicalized to the same end, armed the same and have the same goal. I'm sure we would look at mental capacity if we could get one alive, but until such time, if it walks like a duck............

Ooopps, just about forgot the FLQ.

The terrorists of the sixties, seventies and eighties were motivated more by political beliefs of the far left variety rather than religion. Many had cut their teeth on liberation ideology and had a "radical chic" upper middle class background. While some of the modern genre's western recruits also were from the same social base, their motivation and that of their hosts/sponsors was much more religious than political.

Perhaps that makes it more difficult to deprogram the modern variety. On the other hand, the home grown variety tend towards ideology rather than religion as a motivator. In some cases is is difficult to draw the line between criminal and terrorist.

Terrorism is a term used in its broadest sense to describe the use of intentionally indiscriminate violence as a means to create terror or fear, in order to achieve a political, religious or ideological aim.

Terrorism is a term used in its broadest sense to describe the use of intentionally indiscriminate violence as a means to create terror or fear, in order to achieve a political, religious or ideological aim.

Source: Wikipedia

Both useful ways to see it, and both are more or less on the mark, though we could haggle a bit over what we mean by 'indiscriminate'. I view 'indiscriminate' as a failure to discriminate, e.g. a carpet bombing in a military campaign that goes after military targets but wilfully disregards the disproportionate presence of civilians in the effected area. Conversely, a lot of terrorist operations are very discriminate indeed. They don't care which particular civilians they kill or harm, but they ARE specifically targeting civilian targets in general in order to achieve the desired political effect of their fires.

The terrorists of the sixties, seventies and eighties were motivated more by political beliefs of the far left variety rather than religion. Many had cut their teeth on liberation ideology and had a "radical chic" upper middle class background. While some of the modern genre's western recruits also were from the same social base, their motivation and that of their hosts/sponsors was much more religious than political.

Perhaps that makes it more difficult to deprogram the modern variety. On the other hand, the home grown variety tend towards ideology rather than religion as a motivator. In some cases is is difficult to draw the line between criminal and terrorist.

Terrorism will almost always be also inherently criminal; I struggle to think of where those would not overlap. It is that intent to exert political/ideological/economic influence through that unlawful use of force that pushes acts that are criminal anyway into the more narrow criminal realm of terrorism. As for the home-grown ones, it's hard to tell where religion and ideology start and end and blend in to each other... A lot of discussions could be had about the doctrinal legitimacy of religious justifications for violence/terror; that's outside I think almost all of our arcs here- I'm not aware of anyone on the site who professes theological expertise sufficient to this. Suffice to say a lot of lines are blurred.

It has been my observation both from what has made the news and from what I see at work that many of our 'home growns' do not come from backgrounds that necessarily lend themselves obviously to radicalization. Aaron Driver, the Ontario suicide bomber last year, was the son of an RCAF member. Tevis Gonyou-McLean, who has been in the public eye here in Ottawa as the subject of a terrorist peace bond, is another red headed white kid. who seems to have descended into a combination of drug abuse/mental illness, and then at some point in recent years slid into self-radicalization online. Michael Zehaf-Bibeau (Parliament shooter) was the son of a Canadian bureaucrat and a Libyan businessman, and was Roman Catholic for 22 years before converting and subsequently radicalizing. Martin Couture-Rouleau (St. Jean attack that killed WO Vincent) was a young adult, had recently failed in small business and undergone a religious conversion and brisk self-radicalization.

There are plenty of others who have been reported on, and many more who have not. A lot of them would very easily slip into the current on any major city's streets- living out of the shelters, in and out of drug abuse, uttering paranoid / anti-government rantings that seem more attributable to mental illness than anything. Most will never present a genuine security threat, but of course that cannot necessarily be known at the point of risk assessment. And that switch may flip abruptly and with little warning. We were lucky Aaron driver was an idiot and posted a YouTube video that got the U.S. to alert Canadian authorities. Several of the others, obviously, we did not learn about sufficiently until they acted.

So is there a clear line between criminality, ideology, mental illness, and terrorism? No. I would contend that while mental illness is not a necessary cause i acts of individualized terrorism, it is often present. The ideology in such terrorism is usually linked to at least the perpetrators interpretation of a religion, usually Islam- though this is not always the case; Anders Breivik comes to mind, and the most recent ramming in London looks initially to have been an attack against a religious population but not likely motivated by the attacker's own religious beliefs.

How useful is it truly to have a working definition of terrorism? I would say very, and this is for pragmatic purposes- it gives police and intelligence agencies something to hang their hat on with regards to identified potential threats to the state/society that exist outside the normal rationality of criminal behaviour. I believe there *is* something distinct about someone or a group who want to specifically harm our society, vice those who act criminally for acquisitive purposes, or due to more run of the mill human idiocy- those who target individuals, or satisfy their own sick urges, versus those who deliberately attack the social fabric itself. I believe more steps are justified on the part of the state to combat the latter, and we see that in certain investigative and enforcement powers that put a bit more weight against terrorism offences.

I do not believe we can have a perfect operational definition of terrorism that will be both inclusive and exclusive flawlessly and precisely. I believe we have erred on the side of not including things in terrorism, versus erring on the side of including things that we shouldn't. I believe this is the correct decision to err, because there is still quite a bit that can be done once a risk is identified, even if they don't outright commit terrorist offences. However the legitimacy of such an enhanced security approach rests on us being cautious in its application. I think we mostly get it right.

I believe, unfortunately, that there is no way we can get this 100% right, and that as a result we (the collective Western 'we', inclusive of Canada) will take the odd hit and will suffer losses. Canada has barely seen this yet- we will eventually have major attacks on our soil that will test our resolve and probably make my week very crappy. There is a diminishing rate of return on added security measures, and I think other than certain target hardening there's not a great deal more we can achieve simply by putting more police on the streets (or troops, for that matter, if it came to it). Though I am cognizant that in the past couple of days police and soldiers have interrupted attempted attacks in both Paris and Brussels, resulting in the deaths of two separate suicide bombers who both launched their attacks poorly. So I don't dismiss the utility of the 'boots on the ground' approach in major urban centres at all. Some target areas are reasonably predictable. But that's a decision well above my level.

I don't see a way out of this. We will simply have to keep doing the best we can to be vigilant, flexible, adaptable, and at times promptly ruthless when an imminent threat is identified. And we will have to keep learning from each new attack. I can assure you that a lot of information and training is now flowing to those of us on the front lines in our communities. We'll do our best.

if he was targeting Muslims for the sake of being Muslims then I think that would fall under the definition of hate crime for sure.

It's essentially an attack committed by an identifiable group right?

Let me ask you this. Should we consider attacks against non-Muslims by Muslims hate crimes? An almost crate-Blanche if you will? The term Muslim denotes someone who is a devout follower of Islam. I'd say the Quran has some pretty clear cut views on what to do with non-Muslims. So anyone who identifies as a follower of Islam falls under hate crime laws when committing any violent act against a non-Muslim/s?

A few more pieces of the jigsaw puzzle (https://goo.gl/ZNvkqr) from the U.S. ...

Quote

Domestic extremists tend to be much older, better educated, more affluent, more religious, and are more likely to be white than street gang members, according to a sweeping new University of Colorado Boulder study that systematically compares the groups for the first time.

The study, funded by the U.S. Department of Justice and published in the journal Justice Quarterly, also found that contrary to popular belief, U.S. gang members seldom go on to become radicalized and commit acts of terrorism.

The findings come as the Trump administration has named the large U.S. street gang MS 13 “one of the gravest threats to American public safety,” and ideologically motivated extremism remains a national concern. The authors hope the paper, and related studies, will be used to help inform policies to counter both domestic terrorism and gang participation.

"Both criminal gangs, like MS-13, and domestic extremist groups, like neo-Nazis, pose great risks for crime and violence in the United States,” said lead author David Pyrooz, an assistant professor of sociology. “This study gives us a much better statistical portrait of what such groups look like in relation to each other.”

(...)

In all, the groups showed similarities in only 10 out of 27 measures.

“Overall, these preliminary findings suggest that, on an individual level, policies and programs designed to prevent and intervene in gang membership might not translate very well to domestic extremism,” Pyrooz said. “The jury is still out for group- and community-level approaches.”

That said, the researchers did find a few compelling commonalities that draw people to both types of groups, including strong attachments to like-minded peers and poor employment history ...

Only just spotted this (https://goo.gl/Ruw711) from the NJ Department of Homeland Security & Prearedness - also attached if link doesn't work for you...

Quote

Anarchist Extremists: Antifa

Anti-fascist groups, or “Antifa,” are a subset of the anarchist movement and focus on issues involving racism, sexism, and anti-Semitism, as well as other perceived injustices.

Self-described Antifa groups have been established across the United States and in several major cities, including New York, Philadelphia, Chicago, and San Francisco. A majority of New Jersey-based anarchist groups are affiliated with the Antifa movement and are opposed to “fascism,” racism, and law enforcement. Antifa groups coordinate regionally and have participated in protests in New York City and Philadelphia. There are three loosely organized chapters in New Jersey, known as the North Jersey Antifa, the South Jersey Antifa, and the HubCity Antifa New Brunswick (Middlesex County).

In December 2016, a group known as the Antifascist Action-Nebraska engaged in a doxing campaign against a prominent member of American Vanguard, a white supremacist organization. The group published his personal information on several social media platforms and posted fliers on the University of Nebraska Omaha campus, calling for his expulsion ...

This from the U.S. justice department (https://www.justice.gov/usao-wdok/pr/man-arrested-trying-detonate-what-he-thought-was-vehicle-bomb-downtown-oklahoma-city) ...

Quote

Man Arrested for Trying to Detonate What He Thought was a Vehicle Bomb at Downtown Oklahoma City BankDepartment of Justice, U.S. Attorney’s Office, Western District of Oklahoma, Monday, August 14, 2017

Oklahoma City, Oklahoma — Jerry Drake Varnell, 23, of Sayre, Oklahoma, was arrested early Saturday morning in connection with a plot to detonate a vehicle bomb at BancFirst, 101 N. Broadway, in downtown Oklahoma City, announced Mark A. Yancey, United States Attorney for the Western District of Oklahoma.

According to a criminal complaint filed in the Western District of Oklahoma yesterday, the FBI arrested Varnell at approximately 1:00 am on August 12, 2017, after he attempted to detonate what he believed to be an explosives-laden van he had parked in an alley next to BancFirst. The complaint alleges that Varnell initially wanted to blow up the Federal Reserve Building in Washington, D.C., with a device similar to the 1995 Oklahoma City bombing because he was upset with the government.

The complaint explains that after Varnell’s intentions came to the attention of law enforcement, an undercover FBI agent posed as a person who could assist him. According to the complaint, Varnell took a series of actions to advance his plot. He identified BancFirst as the target, prepared a statement to be posted on social media after the explosion, helped assemble the device, helped load it into what he believed was a stolen van, drove the van by himself from El Reno to BancFirst in downtown Oklahoma City, and dialed a number on a cellular telephone that he believed would trigger the explosion.

Varnell is charged with attempting to use explosives to destroy a building in interstate commerce. If convicted, he would face a maximum sentence of 20 years in prison and a mandatory minimum sentence of five years’ imprisonment. He is expected to make his initial appearance in federal court in Oklahoma City today (14 Aug 2017) at 3:00 pm.

This arrest is the culmination of a long-term domestic terrorism investigation involving an undercover operation, during which Varnell had been monitored closely for months as the alleged bomb plot developed. The device was actually inert, and the public was not in danger. "There was never a concern that our community’s safety or security was at risk during this investigation," said Kathryn Peterson, Special Agent in Charge of the FBI in Oklahoma. "I can assure the public, without hesitation, that we had Varnell’s actions monitored every step of the way."

U.S. Attorney Yancey said: "I commend the devoted work of the FBI and our state law enforcement partners in ensuring that violent plots of this kind never succeed."

The investigation was conducted by the FBI Joint Terrorism Task Force, including members from the Oklahoma City FBI; Homeland Security Investigations, part of the U.S. Department of Homeland Security; the Oklahoma City Police Department; the Edmond Police Department; the Oklahoma Highway Patrol; the Oklahoma Bureau of Narcotics and Dangerous Drugs; and the Oklahoma State Bureau of Investigation. The FBI worked in conjunction with BancFirst during the investigation. Oklahoma District Attorney Angela Marsee, of District 2, also provided assistance. The case is being prosecuted by Assistant U.S. Attorney Matt Dillon, with assistance from the Justice Department’s Counterterrorism Section.

Reference is made to court records for further information. The public is reminded that this complaint is only an allegation and that Varnell is presumed innocent unless and until proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt.

Only just spotted this (https://goo.gl/Ruw711) from the NJ Department of Homeland Security & Prearedness - also attached if link doesn't work for you...

Quote

Anarchist Extremists: Antifa

Anti-fascist groups, or “Antifa,” are a subset of the anarchist movement and focus on issues involving racism, sexism, and anti-Semitism, as well as other perceived injustices ...

And now, for the other side of the coin (https://goo.gl/wLry3g), also from NJ DHS - copy also attached in case link doesn't work for you ...

Quote

The Face of White Supremacy in 2017Traditional White Supremacist Organizations Attempt to “Rebrand”

To appeal to new audiences susceptible to its radical messaging, the national white supremacist movement has tried to deemphasize hate symbols and attacks against non-white communities. These organizations have “rebranded” since at least last year, when they took a more high-profile role with conferences and rallies, official statements, and recruitment efforts ...

The Minister of Public Security, Martin Coiteux, is very aware of the emergence of armed militias of far right in Quebec.

Recent reports have highlighted the presence of these groups, including the organization of the "Three Percenters", an overtly Islamophobic and anti-state group that is particularly active in Alberta and whose members are heavily armed.

This organization is beginning to manifest itself in Quebec as well, a situation that "challenges" the Government of Quebec, according to the Minister of Public Security.

Coiteux said Tuesday at a press conference announcing new flood relief measures last spring that these groups are under police surveillance, as "any group that could potentially pose a risk to the safety of citizens ".

The minister added that, beyond this police reality, his government would be "always intolerant" against these groups "who advocate the exclusion of certain people and who have messages of hatred towards groups ".

According to him, these groups are a direct threat to democracy, diversity and inclusion.

Mr. Coiteux warned that the state will not hesitate to "use the police" if illegal actions are taken, but that besides security issues, its government will defend the common values ​​of Quebec society.

The Face of White Supremacy in 2017Traditional White Supremacist Organizations Attempt to “Rebrand”

This summer, in Toronto, white supremacists were allowed to congregate at a public library.

In an email to the library, Auschwitz survivor Nathan Leipciger, whose entire family was killed by the Nazis, wrote "it is unimaginable that the Toronto Public Library should provide a platform for hatred and bigotry in our wonderful multicultural city."

Mayor John Tory and city councillors also called for the event to be cancelled.

The media showed up. CP24 gave a Holocaust denier more than 5 unbroken minutes of live airtime.

There was no violence, but it was much reported in the news,https://www.google.ca/search?rls=com.microsoft%3Aen-CA%3AIE-Address&rlz=1I7GGHP_en-GBCA592&dcr=0&biw=1280&bih=603&q=toronto+library+%22white+supremacist%22&oq=toronto+library+%22white+supremacist%22&gs_l=psy-ab.3...4280.4280.0.4601.1.1.0.0.0.0.108.108.0j1.1.0.foo%2Cersl%3D1%2Cfett%3D1%2Cewh%3D0%2Cnso-enksa%3D0%2Cnso-enfk%3D1%2Cnso-usnt%3D1%2Cnso-qnt-npqp%3D0-1%2Cnso-qnt-npdq%3D0-45%2Cnso-qnt-npt%3D0-09%2Cnso-qnt-ndc%3D300%2Ccspa-dspm-nm-mnp%3D0-045%2Ccspa-dspm-nm-mxp%3D0-1125%2Cnso-unt-npqp%3D0-15%2Cnso-unt-npdq%3D0-25%2Cnso-unt-npt%3D0-06%2Cnso-unt-ndc%3D300%2Ccspa-uipm-nm-mnp%3D0-0075%2Ccspa-uipm-nm-mxp%3D0-0525.1..0...1.1.64.psy-ab..0.0.0.vxqgXS7VXaM

Also,

Signs in Toronto urge white people to join ‘alt-right’https://www.thestar.com/news/gta/2016/11/14/signs-in-toronto-urge-white-people-to-join-alt-right.html

This (https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/post-nation/wp/2016/10/15/it-will-be-a-bloodbath-inside-the-kansas-militia-plot-to-ignite-a-religious-war/?utm_term=.eac35da248ee) from the Washington Post: (https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/three-kansas-men-charged-plotting-bombing-attack-targeting-local-somali-immigrant-community)

Quote

The “Crusaders” knew they wanted to kill Muslims — and with luck, use the “bloodbath” to ignite a religious war — but for months they couldn’t settle on a plan.

The easiest way would be to grab guns, go to the predominantly Somali-Muslim apartment complex they’d been surveilling and start kicking in doors, court documents said. They would spare no one, not even babies.

In the end, they decided to set off bombs similar to the one Timothy McVeigh used in 1995 to kill 168 people in Oklahoma City. They planned to strike after the Nov. 8 election, investigators said ...

...

Some of the latest on this one via AP (https://www.stripes.com/news/us/transcripts-detail-plot-to-bomb-somali-refugees-in-kansas-1.490555#.WdI_DLjwmi5)...

Quote

Three men accused of conspiring to bomb a Kansas mosque and an apartment complex housing Somali refugees also allegedly discussed killing the refugees' white landlord because he rented to Muslims, a move prosecutors say was meant to ensure the attack fully conveyed their anti-Muslim message.

Details of the alleged plot emerged in government filings in advance of an upcoming detention hearing Wednesday for Gavin Wright. His attorney has argued that Wright was unaware his co-defendants intended to actually carry out the attack, portraying him as a lonely man desperate to find friends after moving to Liberal, a city along southwestern Kansas' border with the Oklahoma Panhandle.

But prosecutors countered Wednesday with court filings that include transcripts of profanity-laced recordings that paint a more damning picture of Wright and a splinter group of the militia Kansas Security Force that came to be known as "the Crusaders" — based on the name "Crusaders 2.0" that they gave to themselves on a phone messaging app.

Prosecutors say the defense mischaracterizes the danger Wright presents if freed before trial. They allege that he manufactured and tested the homemade explosives and hosted group meetings at his business, G&G Mobile Home Center, where authorities later found explosives ...

Guilty (http://www.officer.com/news/12288322/jurors-to-decide-on-death-penalty-for-church-shooter) (highlights mine) ...1 -- These are the federal charges he's been found guilty of - there could be more (http://www.postandcourier.com/church_shooting/dylann-roof-found-guilty-in-emanuel-ame-church-massacre-case/article_c6b12f02-c2c9-11e6-bf62-078489dee328.html):More on this guy here (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dylann_Roof) (usual Wikipedia GIGO caveats apply).

Quote

The federal jury1 of 10 women and two men who found Dylann Roof guilty of federal hate crimes Thursday in the killings of nine African-Americans at a historic Charleston church now must wait more than two weeks for the trial’s next phase.

Jurors on Jan. 3 will begin to hear evidence about whether to give the death penalty or life without parole to the 22-year-old self-avowed white supremacist from Columbia ...

Prosecutors say a terror suspect was ‘brainwashed’ by far-right voices online. Can you blame the people he read? https://www.thestar.com/news/world/analysis/2018/01/27/prosecutors-say-a-terror-suspect-was-brainwashed-by-far-right-voices-online-can-you-blame-the-people-he-read.htmlA series of recent criminal cases are again raising the question of how the spread of hateful or radical views can lead to violence. If the debate sounds familiar, it is.

U.K. prosecutors on Tuesday said a London terror suspect was “brainwashed” by right-wing personalities and online material — including from a Canadian outlet — in the weeks before he allegedly drove a van into Muslim worshippers, killing one.

Earlier this month, a man threatened to shoot CNN employees to fight the network his president mercilessly targets — “Fake news. I’m coming to gun you all down,” a male voice said in a telephone call, according to documents unsealed this week.

And in Canada, a country will on Monday mark the one-year anniversary of a mass shooting at a Quebec City mosque that killed six — an attack in which the suspect was reportedly a fan of French Front National leader Marine Le Pen’s xenophobic views.